Dataset Information

A feasibility study on bedside upper airway ultrasonography compared to waveform capnography for verifying endotracheal tube location after intubation.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In emergency settings, verification of endotracheal tube (ETT) location is important for critically ill patients. Ignorance of oesophageal intubation can be disastrous. Many methods are used for verification of the endotracheal tube location; none are ideal. Quantitative waveform capnography is considered the standard of care for this purpose but is not always available and is expensive. Therefore, this feasibility study is conducted to compare a cheaper alternative, bedside upper airway ultrasonography to waveform capnography, for verification of endotracheal tube location after intubation. METHODS:This was a prospective, single-centre, observational study, conducted at the HRPB, Ipoh. It included patients who were intubated in the emergency department from 28 March 2012 to 17 August 2012. A waiver of consent had been obtained from the Medical Research Ethics Committee. Bedside upper airway ultrasonography was performed after intubation and compared to waveform capnography. Specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive value and likelihood ratio are calculated. RESULTS:A sample of 107 patients were analysed, and 6 (5.6%) had oesophageal intubations. The overall accuracy of bedside upper airway ultrasonography was 98.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 93.0% to 100.0%). The kappa value (?) was 0.85, indicating a very good agreement between the bedside upper airway ultrasonography and waveform capnography. Thus, bedside upper airway ultrasonography is in concordance with waveform capnography. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of bedside upper airway ultrasonography were 98.0% (95% CI 93.0% to 99.8%), 100% (95% CI 54.1% to 100.0%), 100% (95% CI 96.3% to 100.0%) and 75.0% (95% CI 34.9% to 96.8%). The likelihood ratio of a positive test is infinite and the likelihood ratio of a negative test is 0.0198 (95% CI 0.005 to 0.0781). The mean confirmation time by ultrasound is 16.4 s. No adverse effects were recorded. CONCLUSIONS:Our study shows that ultrasonography can replace waveform capnography in confirming ETT placement in centres without capnography. This can reduce incidence of unrecognised oesophageal intubation and prevent morbidity and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION:National Medical Research Register NMRR11100810230.

SUBMITTER: Adi O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3772703 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A feasibility study on bedside upper airway ultrasonography compared to waveform capnography for verifying endotracheal tube location after intubation.

Adi Osman O Chuan Tan Wan TW Rishya Manikam M

Critical ultrasound journal 20130704 1

<h4>Background</h4>In emergency settings, verification of endotracheal tube (ETT) location is important for critically ill patients. Ignorance of oesophageal intubation can be disastrous. Many methods are used for verification of the endotracheal tube location; none are ideal. Quantitative waveform capnography is considered the standard of care for this purpose but is not always available and is expensive. Therefore, this feasibility study is conducted to compare a cheaper alternative, bedside u ...[more]

PMID: 23826756

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTracheal intubation is one of the most daily practiced procedures performed in intensive care unit (ICU). It is associated with severe life-threatening complications, which can lead to intubation-related cardiac arrest. Using a preshaped endotracheal tube plus stylet may have potential advantages over endotracheal tube without stylet. The stylet is a rigid but malleable introducer which fits inside the endotracheal tube and allows for manipulation of the tube shape; to facilitate passage of the tube through the laryngeal inlet. However, some complications from stylets have been reported including mucosal bleeding, perforation of the trachea or oesophagus and sore throat. The use of a stylet for first-attempt intubation has never been assessed in ICU and benefit remains to be established.Methods and analysisThe endotracheal tube plus stylet to increase first-attempt success during orotracheal intubation compared with endotracheal tube alone in ICU patients (STYLETO) trial is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, stratified, parallel-group unblinded trial with an electronic system-based randomisation. Patients will be randomly assigned to undergo the initial intubation attempt with endotracheal tube alone (ie,without stylet, control group) or endotracheal tube + stylet (experimental group). The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with successful first-attempt orotracheal intubation. The single, prespecified, secondary outcome is the incidence of complications related to intubation, in the hour following intubation. Other outcomes analysed will include safety, exploratory procedural and clinical outcomes.Ethics and disseminationThe study project has been approved by the appropriate ethics committee 'Comité-de-Protection-des-Personnes Nord-Ouest3-19.04.26.65808 Cat2 RECHMPL19_0216/STYLETO2019-A01180-57'". Informed consent is required. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences. If combined use of endotracheal tube plus stylet facilitates tracheal intubation of ICU patients compared with endotracheal tube alone, its use will become standard practice, thereby decreasing first-attempt intubation failure rates and, potentially, the frequency of intubation-related complications.Trial registration detailsClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04079387; Pre-results.

Project description:Airway management is a crucial skill essential to paramedics and personnel working in Emergency Medical Services and Emergency Departments: Lack of practice, a difficult airway, or a trauma situation may limit the ability of paramedics to perform direct laryngoscopy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Videoscope devices are alternatives for airway management in these situations. The ETView VivaSight SL (ETView; ETView Ltd., Misgav, Israel) is a new, single-lumen airway tube with an integrated high-resolution imaging camera. To assess if the ETView VivaSight SL can be a superior alternative to a standard endotracheal tube for intubation in an adult cadaver model, both during and without simulated CPR.ETView VivaSight SL tube was investigated via an interventional, randomized, crossover, cadaver study. A total of 52 paramedics participated in the intubation of human cadavers in three different scenarios: a normal airway at rest without concomitant chest compression (CC) (scenario A), a normal airway with uninterrupted CC (scenario B) and manual in-line stabilization (scenario C). Time and rate of success for intubation, the glottic view scale, and ease-of-use of ETView vs. sETT intubation were assessed for each emergency scenario.The median time to intubation using ETView vs. sETT was compared for each of the aforementioned scenarios. For scenario A, time to first ventilation was achieved fastest for ETView, 19.5 [IQR, 16.5-22] sec, when compared to that of sETT at 21.5 [IQR, 20-25] sec (p?=?.013). In scenario B, the time for intubation using ETView was 21 [IQR, 18.5-24.5] sec (p?<?.001) and sETT was 27 [IQR, 24.5-31.5] sec. Time to first ventilation for scenario C was 23.5 [IQR, 19-25.5] sec for the ETView and 42.5 [IQR, 35-49.5] sec for sETT.In normal airways and situations with continuous chest compressions, the success rate for intubation of cadavers and the time to ventilation were improved with the ETView. The time to glottis view, tube insertion, and cuff block were all found to be shorter with the ETView.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02733536.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine which bedside method of detecting inadvertent endobronchial intubation in adults has the highest sensitivity and specificity.DesignProspective randomised blinded study.SettingDepartment of anaesthesia in tertiary academic hospital.Participants160 consecutive patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists category I or II) aged 19-75 scheduled for elective gynaecological or urological surgery.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to eight study groups. In four groups, an endotracheal tube was fibreoptically positioned 2.5-4.0 cm above the carina, whereas in the other four groups the tube was positioned in the right mainstem bronchus. The four groups differed in the bedside test used to verify the position of the endotracheal tube. To determine whether the tube was properly positioned in the trachea, in each patient first year residents and experienced anaesthetists were randomly assigned to independently perform bilateral auscultation of the chest (auscultation); observation and palpation of symmetrical chest movements (observation); estimation of the position of the tube by the insertion depth (tube depth); or a combination of all three (all three).Main outcome measuresCorrect and incorrect judgments of endotracheal tube position.Results160 patients underwent 320 observations by experienced and inexperienced anaesthetists. First year residents missed endobronchial intubation by auscultation in 55% of cases and performed significantly worse than experienced anaesthetists with this bedside test (odds ratio 10.0, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 434). With a sensitivity of 88% (95% confidence interval 75% to 100%) and 100%, respectively, tube depth and the three tests combined were significantly more sensitive for detecting endobronchial intubation than auscultation (65%, 49% to 81%) or observation(43%, 25% to 60%) (P<0.001). The four tested methods had the same specificity for ruling out endobronchial intubation (that is, confirming correct tracheal intubation). The average correct tube insertion depth was 21 cm in women and 23 cm in men. By inserting the tube to these distances, however, the distal tip of the tube was less than 2.5 cm away from the carina (the recommended safety distance, to prevent inadvertent endobronchial intubation with changes in the position of the head in intubated patients) in 20% (24/118) of women and 18% (7/42) of men. Therefore optimal tube insertion depth was considered to be 20 cm in women and 22 cm in men.ConclusionLess experienced clinicians should rely more on tube insertion depth than on auscultation to detect inadvertent endobronchial intubation. But even experienced physicians will benefit from inserting tubes to 20-21 cm in women and 22-23 cm in men, especially when high ambient noise precludes accurate auscultation (such as in emergency situations or helicopter transport). The highest sensitivity and specificity for ruling out endobronchial intubation, however, is achieved by combining tube depth, auscultation of the lungs, and observation of symmetrical chest movements.Trial registrationNCT01232166.

Project description:BackgroundAfter clinical evaluation in the emergency department (ED), facial burn patients are usually intubated to protect their airways. However, the possibility of unnecessary intubation or delayed intubation after admission exists. Objective criteria for the evaluation of inhalation injury and the need for airway protection in facial burn patients are needed.MethodsFacial burn patients between January 2013 and May 2016 were reviewed. Patients who were and were not intubated in the ED were compared. All the intubated patients received routine bronchoscopy and laboratory tests to evaluate whether they had inhalation injuries. The patients with and without confirmed inhalation injuries were compared. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the independent risk factors for inhalation injuries in the facial burn patients. The reasons for intubation in the patients without inhalation injuries were also investigated.ResultsDuring the study period, 121 patients were intubated in the ED among a total of 335 facial burn patients. Only 73 (60.3%) patients were later confirmed to have inhalation injuries on bronchoscopy. The comparison between the patients with and without inhalation injuries showed that shortness of breath (odds ratio = 3.376, p = 0.027) and high total body surface area (TBSA) (odds ratio = 1.038, p = 0.001) were independent risk factors for inhalation injury. Other physical signs (e.g., hoarseness, burned nostril hair, etc.), laboratory examinations and chest X-ray findings were not predictive of inhalation injury in facial burn patients. All the patients with a TBSA over 60% were intubated in the ED even if they did not have inhalation injuries.ConclusionsIn the management of facial burn patients, positive signs on conventional physical examinations may not always be predictive of inhalation injury and the need for endotracheal tube intubation in the ED. More attention should be given to facial burn patients with shortness of breath and a high TBSA. Airway protection is needed in facial burn patients without inhalation injuries because of their associated injuries and treatments.

Dataset Information

A feasibility study on bedside upper airway ultrasonography compared to waveform capnography for verifying endotracheal tube location after intubation.

Publications

A feasibility study on bedside upper airway ultrasonography compared to waveform capnography for verifying endotracheal tube location after intubation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets